House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says Americans could "absorb" higher deficits in exchange for more jobs.

Building the case for a brand new jobs-creation bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says most Americans would not mind inflating the already-gaping deficit in exchange for more jobs.

The California Democrat said on a conference call Tuesday that Americans could "absorb" the hit to the federal budget, and she argued that their biggest complaint is not that the deficit is big -- it's that they're not seeing any benefit in return for increasing the U.S. debt load.

Despite the $787 billion stimulus package passed in February, unemployment climbed to 10.2 percent in October. While critics cite the jobless rate as a sign that the stimulus has failed, Pelosi argues that the federal government is just not trying hard enough.

"We have to shed any weakness that anybody may have about not wanting to be confrontational on this subject for fear that we'd be labeled not sensitive to the deficit," Pelosi said, in a recording posted by Think Progress.

"The American people have an anger about the growth of the deficit because they're not getting anything for it. ... If somebody has the idea that the percentage of GDP of what our national debt is will go up a bit, but they will now -- and their neighbors and their children -- will have jobs, I think they could absorb that, and then we ride it out and bring money in," she said.

"But I think if anybody is asking the public, 'Would you rather have a job or the percentage of GDP of our national debt would go up a little bit?' I think that everybody wants a job."

House Democrats are not calling the expected jobs proposal a "stimulus," though it would probably include similar measures like infrastructure spending.

The drumbeat for jobs-creating legislation is running up against heightened wariness about increasing the deficit in the Obama administration. President Obama, who ran up a $1.4 trillion deficit in fiscal 2009, reportedly plans to focus on deficit reduction in his State of the Union address next year.

But Pelosi urged the president to find a "balance" between jobs creation and deficit reduction. She said the two are not mutually exclusive.

"We don't subscribe to the idea that some are for deficit reduction and some are for job creation. We think that is ... a false choice," Pelosi said.

"We're never going to decrease the deficit until we create jobs, bring revenue into the Treasury, stimulate the economy so we have growth."

She called the recent deficit growth "stunning," but said the United States risks being too timid.

"If we pull our punch, as they did in the '30s, the mid-'30s, we shouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself," Pelosi said.

I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say "Yes, I trust you Nancy and I'd be glad to absorb more debt".

Donger

11-25-2009, 01:44 PM

Just leave it the f*ck alone, Democrats. Please.

Otter

11-25-2009, 02:01 PM

Good Lord

petegz28

11-25-2009, 02:05 PM

So then WTF happened to the first stimulus, Nancy?

BigRedChief

11-25-2009, 02:06 PM

So then WTF happened to the first stimulus, Nancy?Good question? Nancy needs to keep her grubby mitts off any bill.

blaise

11-25-2009, 02:09 PM

Maybe they can boast about using a couple billion to save 85 jobs again.

Stinger

11-25-2009, 02:13 PM

Building the case for a brand new jobs-creation bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says most Americans would not mind inflating the already-gaping deficit in exchange for more jobs.

The California Democrat said on a conference call Tuesday that Americans could "absorb" the hit to the federal budget, and she argued that their biggest complaint is not that the deficit is big -- it's that they're not seeing any benefit in return for increasing the U.S. debt load.

Despite the $787 billion stimulus package passed in February, unemployment climbed to 10.2 percent in October. While critics cite the jobless rate as a sign that the stimulus has failed, Pelosi argues that the federal government is just not trying hard enough.

http://img.snlarc.jt.org/caps/characters/JoLo-Tommy%20Flanagan.jpg

Yeah that's the ticket ...........

HonestChieffan

11-25-2009, 02:25 PM

Landslide 2010

Otter

11-25-2009, 02:25 PM

"first we'll run California into the ground, and then [evil laugh] the country".

FishingRod

11-25-2009, 02:26 PM

[B][SIZE=2]

it's that they're not seeing any benefit in return for increasing the U.S. debt load.

You know for all the anger, mean shots, and criticsm from the liberals on this BB I see toward a woman who has never represented anyone but those in Alaska (Sarah Palin), you would think at least one of them would have testicles to stand up and say "I am tired of that lying sack of crap Nancy Pelosi and her dragging our agenda through the mud. I can't believe she represents us".

I guess you are all too worried about book sales and what part of Russia you can see from Alaska.
Posted via Mobile Device

CoMoChief

11-25-2009, 03:42 PM

This bitch is downright out of fucking control

Bwana

11-25-2009, 03:51 PM

What a useless snatch.

Garcia Bronco

11-25-2009, 04:01 PM

What a useless snatch.

I bet the snatch is in near mint condition. It's the rest of her that's useless.

Otter

11-25-2009, 04:40 PM

You know for all the anger, mean shots, and criticsm from the liberals on this BB I see toward a woman who has never represented anyone but those in Alaska (Sarah Palin), you would think at least one of them would have testicles to stand up and say "I am tired of that lying sack of crap Nancy Pelosi and her dragging our agenda through the mud. I can't believe she represents us".

I guess you are all too worried about book sales and what part of Russia you can see from Alaska.
Posted via Mobile Device

Rep x1000

HonestChieffan

11-25-2009, 04:45 PM

Name calling and personal attacks are reserved for anyone they disagree with, facts they do not like, and those they see as rightist, bigoted, or employed and contributing.

mlyonsd

11-25-2009, 05:02 PM

One thing's for certain, even the Speaker of the House, a dem, recognizes how little the last stimulus did for jobs.

I'm glad to see we can scratch that off the list of things to argue about.

bluehawkdoc

11-25-2009, 09:32 PM

I bet the snatch is in near mint condition. It's the rest of her that's useless.

Have you seen a close-up of "Nancy"? I think we should check her for balls.

trndobrd

11-26-2009, 04:21 AM

Two heart beats away from the Presidency.

007

11-26-2009, 06:15 AM

Two heart beats away from the Presidency.Shut up!!! Shut the hell up!!!!STFU:)

RINGLEADER

11-26-2009, 10:48 AM

Beyond the idiocy of her statement -- which I don't really mind because the more they go down this path the less likely it will be that the Dems will have any ability to do any more damage beyond 2010 -- the real problem that none of them seem to get is that creating a government job has no exponential effect on the job market or the economy. Incentivizing small business (or any private sector) through tax policy is the only meaningful tool the government has to start that ball rolling and unfortunately the Dems at all levels of power right now are pretty much opposed to such an application. They use tax policy for punitive measures to change behavior. They see no benefits in incentivizing individuals and companies to create things and build businesses that could transform whatever tax breaks are awarded into more than the single job that the same investment in the government sector might create for a short period of time (and then need to be re-funded with ANOTHER stimulus to continue the same short-term government job down the road).

Maybe if Obama had some people around him who actually got this very novel concept he would entertain the thought. Instead they seem to have no faith in the ingenuity or determination of the individual and point to the possibility of failure in the private sector when, in actuality, spending to create faux government jobs leads to only destination -- the end of that job when the funding for it runs out. For the vast, vast majority of public-sector employment there simply is no such things as a self-sustaining government job, much less a self-replicating one.